It can, if you limit the user to somebody who only clicks on Icons, and never tries to do more than that. Which appears to be Microsoft's new security model.
No amount of software can solve a social problem. Period.
The weird thing is, the portion of his anecdotal message that you chose to ignore states that a specific amount of software (Mac OSX) did* solve this problem. Umm, period.
Of course, signing an application and/or adding a key should be just hard enough that joe-sixpack won't learn how. And this doesn't block out opensource or small shareware authors... either group can get signing keys easily enough, and it should be relatively easy and inexpensive to get your signing key added to windows update.
Wow, man, wow.
Product Activation extended beyond the core OS and into each App as it is installed.
Bill Gates better get a new titanium ring. All the ring kissing required to run your Apps on Windows is going to require a durable one on his finger.
I know it shouldn't come as a surprise that Microsoft would adopt such a top-down security model. Hopefully when they go out of business people will have ways of recovering from the titantic loss when all their little 'doze boxes and apps become impossible to run.
Please, oh please, Mr. Bill, can I run ** on my computer???
Linux isn't automatically more secure. The only way to make something automatically more secure is to disconnect it from anything even remotely resembling a network, to limit physical access to the machine to one person (yourself), and to never install anything.
Now hold on a minute here. I've seen that quote used before, but it was always with 'Windows' where you pasted in 'Linux.' And the real joke is that when Windows got 'a high security rating' from the government, that was specifically how it was configured for the security audit.
You can't just switch a few proper nouns and turn a trueism into a FUD slogan.
the reason to upgrade to Vista is its significantly higher security than XP,
Unfortunately, said security is engineered to lock the user out. It's no surprise that Microsoft paid little attention to security until it was needed for DRM. Running Vista means essentially giving your computer away to the **AAs.
So now you're talking about a steady stream? Putting another $10M of goods/resources out on one of these things each day? That sounds like it is getting to be a really HEAVY supply chain. You're 'floating $300M worth of stuff at any one time, if it's a 30 day trip.
this is still a very rich nation that should take care of its citizens, whether it be a native village in Alaska with a vibrant hunting culture
So we send in a team of cultural anthropologists with cameras now, so there are filmstrips to show to their grandchildren in the trailer park, in... Seattle.
(really, really NICE trailers. And a Casino to operate, so they can be a 'self supporting community' of course.)
Lets say in San Francisco had paper thin sidewalks in random locations, causing people to fall to their deaths, and man eating lions roaming the streets. Thats absolute nonsense -- nobody would let that happen, right? If it was allowed to persist, that would almost be a human rights issue..and..hmmm..back to where we started.
I don't think the people in San Francisco would sue Exxon. I don't think that would be the solution they would choose at all.
You cannot just pick up a group of people and relocate them from a place they don't want to leave.
Agreed, instead, we should 'protect' their culture. I say we start by keeping these outside lawyers from getting in and stirring them all up. They'll move on of their own free will if and when they choose. 'Cuz they're free, right? If they want to 'enter the modern system' by lawyering up, they've, uh, ceased being all quaint and aboriginal, right? I guess they can still dress up once in awhile for the postcard photographers.
So what happens when the people in said community start using dynamite-tipped harpoons to hunt the whales?
Are they allowed to use aluminum boats?
My Uncle lived on Sitka for quite awhile. The native people had always fed the kids blubber as a treat. When he was there, they had switched to Crisco with raisins in it....
Say you're a sexually abused child. Your daddy's 'culture' says it isn't sexual abuse, it's the 'rites of passage' in his culture. All fine and valid, because 'culture is relative' right??
Is a police force going to be established to prevent missionaries (or the police, or child protection agents) from swooping in and taking you away from daddy? They're stealing your 'culture' maaaan!
Let's not get into a 6821 vs. 8255 flameware, btw. (the nerd* equivalent of vi vs. emacs)
(* a 'nerd' is the real thing. Not just a phillips screwdriver wielding 'geek' who thinks he "knows hardware" because he can screw a motherboard down into a case and attach the power leads.)
So does this mean my robotics and embedded controller hobby becomes a terraist practice?
Will I be required to register those tubes full of PIC controllers? What about the tubes of 68HC11s and all those 8039's and 8051's? Do I have to dress up the tubes of 8522's in burkhas?
Seriously, are there going to be people looking at me suspiciously at Borders when I browse the latest 'Build yerself a robot' paperbacks in the Engineering/Tech section?
The Warrant doesn't 'violate' constitutional rights. It helps establish them, by specifying a mechanism that defines the only way certain enforcement actions can be taken without violating said rights.
In the real world, 'freedom' always exists within a walled garden with democractially appointed agents to defend the freedom of non-aggressors to interact with one another. Anything more global than that is a 'pretend' scenario. Some of the people most loudly and shrilly insisting on the right to 'pretend' are just hanging out waiting for marks.
There's already a metaphor out there to emulate to fix the email problem.
1. Establish government-run institutions called 'post offices' through which mail is routed if it is considered legimitate.
2. Charge per message to route through said 'post offices.' Set up a regional/global network to route mail between the post offices.
3. Promote said network of 'post offices' as a legitimate controlled medium through which people can communicate.
The rest is just sitting and waiting for people to start use it. They don't even need to be 'government run' just a trusted network of peer groups.
The end-to-end authentication is a technical detail that isn't *that* hard to work out and implement, with public key encryption.
Listservs can switch to a Usenet type model outside the 'paid' network. Kinda a post-Usenet version of Usenet, using scp to shuttle around the big packages of messages between 'trusting peers' with the trust based on peer relationships outside the 'official mail system.'
You just have to break out of the notion that anybody anywhere can run a mail server that any other mail server 'trusts' to a restricted model of a very few trusted mail servers. For email, nothing else needs to be restricted, it just won't de-facto be supported by ISPs, because people will abandon the old way as soon as they discover the security of the new way.
Kinda sucks, though, if you're a net cowboy who's been pretending you are 'anonymous' for the last few decades, of course.
Slashdot Mirror
Some of the BSD's are quite small as well.
.iso for NetBSD/i386 (one of the most bloated archs) is 247MB.
The size of the Base Install
So you get a complete Windowing System and full networking in a 500 MB footprint. And much smaller if you don't need X11.
Granted, you don't get a fully cocked and loaded DRM mechanism aimed at locking you away from your own hardware....
It can, if you limit the user to somebody who only clicks on Icons, and never tries to do more than that.
Which appears to be Microsoft's new security model.
No amount of software can solve a social problem. Period.
The weird thing is, the portion of his anecdotal message that you chose to ignore states that a specific amount of software (Mac OSX) did* solve this problem. Umm, period.
Of course, signing an application and/or adding a key should be just hard enough that joe-sixpack won't learn how. And this doesn't block out opensource or small shareware authors... either group can get signing keys easily enough, and it should be relatively easy and inexpensive to get your signing key added to windows update.
Wow, man, wow.
Product Activation extended beyond the core OS and into each App as it is installed.
Bill Gates better get a new titanium ring. All the ring kissing required to run your Apps on Windows is going to require a durable one on his finger.
I know it shouldn't come as a surprise that Microsoft would adopt such a top-down security model. Hopefully when they go out of business people will have ways of recovering from the titantic loss when all their little 'doze boxes and apps become impossible to run.
Please, oh please, Mr. Bill, can I run ** on my computer???
(servile sniveling fools)
Linux isn't automatically more secure. The only way to make something automatically more secure is to disconnect it from anything even remotely resembling a network, to limit physical access to the machine to one person (yourself), and to never install anything.
Now hold on a minute here. I've seen that quote used before, but it was always with 'Windows' where you pasted in 'Linux.' And the real joke is that when Windows got 'a high security rating' from the government, that was specifically how it was configured for the security audit.
You can't just switch a few proper nouns and turn a trueism into a FUD slogan.
(Actually, you can...)
the reason to upgrade to Vista is its significantly higher security than XP,
Unfortunately, said security is engineered to lock the user out. It's no surprise that Microsoft paid little attention to security until it was needed for DRM. Running Vista means essentially giving your computer away to the **AAs.
You're running some little embedded kernel that is being called 'Linux' by somebody.
It isn't the Linux that runs on desktop machines. Your claim is like the stuff Microsoft (used to?) say about Windows CE.
Bring up emacs on that watch.
They should rename it Multics.
I don't think they can hire Brooks to manage it, though.
By which point, of course, you'd have either no customers left, or only staggeringly stupid customers.
, if a steady stream is established,
So now you're talking about a steady stream? Putting another $10M of goods/resources out on one of these things each day? That sounds like it is getting to be a really HEAVY supply chain. You're 'floating $300M worth of stuff at any one time, if it's a 30 day trip.
What makes you think such a vessel wouldn't have a GPS and an uplink device to report it's location?
this is still a very rich nation that should take care of its citizens, whether it be a native village in Alaska with a vibrant hunting culture
So we send in a team of cultural anthropologists with cameras now, so there are filmstrips to show to their grandchildren in the trailer park, in... Seattle.
(really, really NICE trailers. And a Casino to operate, so they can be a 'self supporting community' of course.)
I don't think the people in San Francisco would sue Exxon. I don't think that would be the solution they would choose at all.
You cannot just pick up a group of people and relocate them from a place they don't want to leave.
Agreed, instead, we should 'protect' their culture. I say we start by keeping these outside lawyers from getting in and stirring them all up. They'll move on of their own free will if and when they choose. 'Cuz they're free, right? If they want to 'enter the modern system' by lawyering up, they've, uh, ceased being all quaint and aboriginal, right? I guess they can still dress up once in awhile for the postcard photographers.
Don't worry. The election is over in November. We can work out the details for next time later.
So what happens when the people in said community start using dynamite-tipped harpoons to hunt the whales?
Are they allowed to use aluminum boats?
My Uncle lived on Sitka for quite awhile. The native people had always fed the kids blubber as a treat. When he was there, they had switched to Crisco with raisins in it....
That's not what is happening.
Say you're a sexually abused child. Your daddy's 'culture' says it isn't sexual abuse, it's the 'rites of passage' in his culture. All fine and valid, because 'culture is relative' right??
Is a police force going to be established to prevent missionaries (or the police, or child protection agents) from swooping in and taking you away from daddy? They're stealing your 'culture' maaaan!
Well, when someone 'bigger' comes along, they can break up that marble game, no?
Since you've endorse the notion of 'force makes right.'
Enjoy yourself sitting over in that corner.
I don't have a right to hit you in the face, or pollute your land, or fuck up the atmosphere we all breath.
You'd best not exhale, then. 'Cuz Clem over there has a two-by-four he's gonna whack you with if you do.
I meant, of course, 8255 not 8522.
Let's not get into a 6821 vs. 8255 flameware, btw. (the nerd* equivalent of vi vs. emacs)
(* a 'nerd' is the real thing. Not just a phillips screwdriver wielding 'geek' who thinks he "knows hardware" because he can screw a motherboard down into a case and attach the power leads.)
So does this mean my robotics and embedded controller hobby becomes a terraist practice?
Will I be required to register those tubes full of PIC controllers? What about the tubes of 68HC11s and all those 8039's and 8051's? Do I have to dress up the tubes of 8522's in burkhas?
Seriously, are there going to be people looking at me suspiciously at Borders when I browse the latest 'Build yerself a robot' paperbacks in the Engineering/Tech section?
The Warrant doesn't 'violate' constitutional rights. It helps establish them, by specifying a mechanism that defines the only way certain enforcement actions can be taken without violating said rights.
In the real world, 'freedom' always exists within a walled garden with democractially appointed agents to defend the freedom of non-aggressors to interact with one another. Anything more global than that is a 'pretend' scenario. Some of the people most loudly and shrilly insisting on the right to 'pretend' are just hanging out waiting for marks.
I remember an old hippie/protester chant.
Wasn't it 'Burn Baby! Burn!' or something like that??
There's already a metaphor out there to emulate to fix the email problem.
1. Establish government-run institutions called 'post offices' through which mail is routed if it is considered legimitate.
2. Charge per message to route through said 'post offices.' Set up a regional/global network to route mail between the post offices.
3. Promote said network of 'post offices' as a legitimate controlled medium through which people can communicate.
The rest is just sitting and waiting for people to start use it. They don't even need to be 'government run' just a trusted network of peer groups.
The end-to-end authentication is a technical detail that isn't *that* hard to work out and implement, with public key encryption.
Listservs can switch to a Usenet type model outside the 'paid' network. Kinda a post-Usenet version of Usenet, using scp to shuttle around the big packages of messages between 'trusting peers' with the trust based on peer relationships outside the 'official mail system.'
You just have to break out of the notion that anybody anywhere can run a mail server that any other mail server 'trusts' to a restricted model of a very few trusted mail servers. For email, nothing else needs to be restricted, it just won't de-facto be supported by ISPs, because people will abandon the old way as soon as they discover the security of the new way.
Kinda sucks, though, if you're a net cowboy who's been pretending you are 'anonymous' for the last few decades, of course.